Journal
article
“The use of Creole alongside Standard English to stimulate
students’ learning” by William Henry in Forum,
vol.42, no.1, 2000, pp.23-7). The author of this article is a teacher
of English and History at a Caribbean Saturday Supplementary School
in London, attended largely by students of African and Caribbean
origin, with ages ranging from 5 to 16. The article explores the
question: What are the advantages of valuing Creole in the school
when the teaching is aimed at the acquisition of standard English?
Several answers are given. The first has to do with cognitive reasons:
it is easier for students to use their home language, rather than
a new language, to acquire knowledge and develop intellectually.

The second answer is concerned with issues of identity: “All
dialects or Creoles are close to the speakers’ identity and
feelings of self worth” (p.24). Black people in Britain already
face prejudice, discrimination and negative stereotyping in the
media, and their history and culture are not sufficiently regarded
by society in general, including the schools. The author notes that
“by allowing black children the freedom to use some Creole
in their written work, we are exposing them to their roots and introducing
white children to the richness of another culture. This should lead
to greater mutual respect…” (pp.24-5).

Another benefit of using Creole in the classroom is that children
enjoy it, and this increases their motivation and enthusiasm for
learning. Although some parents oppose the use of Creole in education
because of the dominant standard language ideology, many others
support the idea.

Books
and Book Chapters
On Jamaican Creole
Two publications have appeared concerning Jamaican Creole and education.
The first is The Role of Jamaican Creole in Language
Education by Velma Pollard (Society for Caribbean
Linguistics Popular Series Paper No.2, 2002). This short booklet
(10 pages) first describes the place of Jamaican Creole (JC) and
English in Jamaica, and the social and linguistic relationships
between them. The author notes that in talking about the role of
JC in language education one is actually talking about the role
of JC in teaching English. She argues that the first step is to
acknowledge the existence of the two languages in Jamaica and how
they complement each other, and to teach the appropriate contexts
of use of each of them. Pollard believes that the main goal of teachers
should be teaching English so that children can become bilingual.
She recommends literature as an important resource for teachers,
particularly in making students aware of the distinctions between
JC and English, and also suggests the use of translation activities.

Language in Jamaica by Pauline Christie
(Arawak Publications, Kingston, 2003) has a chapter on “Language
in Education” (pp.39-49). The author reports that a large
proportion of Jamaican students come to school as monolingual speakers
of JC with little exposure to English. Up to 1998, fewer than half
of the candidates from Jamaica who sat for the Caribbean Examinations
Council exams passed in English (p.40).

Christie cites the stigmatization of students’ home language
in the schools as one reason for this failure, and she defends the
idea of stopping the rejection of children’s mother tongue
in the school environment:

It could at least
lead to a lessening of the culture shock experienced by some children
when they first arrive at school and the feeling of alienation this
often engenders. … If children do not feel at home in school,
some of them soon reject it and simultaneously set up a block against
learning English which is associated in their minds with school.
(p.40)

With regard to suggestions that standards would improve if children
heard only standard English at home and school, the author says
that this is completely impractical in the real Jamaica, where code-switching
is the norm, and many parents do not know much standard English.

Christie also refers to the work of Dennis Craig showing that school
children often fail to recognize the structural differences between
their own language and standard English, and suggests that “teachers
have to know more about the structure and also the social roles
of both English and Creole” (p.42).

The chapter continues with a discussion of recent calls from different
interest groups for the place of JC in the education system to be
formalized. There have been strong reactions against these calls
by the media and the general public, expressing the following concerns:
that using Creole would threaten English as the medium of instruction,
that
Creole is not qualified to have a role in education (and never could
be), and that such proposals are aimed at keeping Jamaicans backward.
The author observes (pp.43-4): “Those who consider that Creole
is an extra resource to be exploited rather than kept in a back
room are treated as hypocrites.”

Three main viewpoints about the use of JC in education are then
described. The first view is to use Creole as a medium of instruction.
This view does not deny the importance of English, but rather promotes
bilingual education. Its two main priorities are “(1) to minimize
the psychological problems arising from the gap between home and
school [and] (2) to help the child achieve proficiency in English”
(p.44). Another related perspective is that Creole should be used
orally in the schools to facilitate ease of transition and early
learning, but English should be introduced early and take over as
the medium of instruction as soon as students are proficient enough
in it. This perspective “is informed by research findings
that children learn best in their native language in their early
years” but “it acknowledges that Creole is not ready
for use as a language of literacy, nor is establishing literacy
in Creole, even at the initial stage of schooling, considered a
priority” (p.45).

The second view is to teach Creole in schools. This view is often
misunderstood to mean teaching the language to children who already
know it. However, it really refers to teaching about the language,
its varieties, and its written form, much as English-speaking students
are taught English in other countries.

The third view is to “make use of Creole in school as considered
necessary in specified situations” (p.45). According to this
view, English should remain the medium of instruction, but teachers
should use Creole where necessary to make sure their students understand
the subject matter. (Of course, as Christie points out, many teachers
have been using Creole informally in this way for a long time, both
consciously and unconsciously.) This view is the one currently advocated
by the Ministry of Education. Christie reports (p.46):

The ROSE (Reform
of Secondary Education) programme endorsed by the Ministry also
proposes that students should be allowed to express themselves freely,
employing whatever variety makes them comfortable in the classroom
and outside. In other words, while English should be the sole formal
medium of education, teachers should help their pupils to acquire
it by making it easier for them to learn all subjects and also by
making them feel less self-conscious about the language they bring
to school.

This policy comes a long way from the days when Creole was officially
banned from classrooms.

Christie goes on to mention some practical criticisms of each of
these views – some concerning costs of classroom materials
and training teachers and others concerning negative public attitudes.
The linguistic problems also exist with regard to the difficulty
of separating Creole and English, and the fact that a significant
number of children would not be familiar with a standardized Creole.
But with regard to the criticism that using Creole in schools would
“keep Jamaicans backward”, Christie points out that
the traditional education system, in which over half the students
fail, has already kept many Jamaicans backward (p.48). She concludes:

[T]o recognize
the potential of Creole is neither pandering to more or less monolingual
Creole speakers nor “descending” to their level. Rather,
it is going where they are, in an effort to improve their status
in society by helping them to gain more from their schooling, including
more English. The aim is to have learning designed for them rather
than in spite of them. The real issue today is not whether Creole
should be taken seriously into account in educational planning but
rather whether we can afford not to take it seriously into account
in one way or another.

The final chapter in the book, “The Jamaican situation in
perspective” also contains a section on “Creoles in
education” (pp.56-61). This section first describes the use
of creole languages as the medium of instruction to teach initial
literacy in three different countries: Haiti, Curaçao (Netherlands
Antilles) [see report above], and the Seychelles. It also describes
other initiatives using pidgins and creoles in the classroom, including
Ron Kephart’s efforts to teach initial literacy in Carriacou
Creole and Katherine Fischer’s Carribean Academic Program
in Evanston, Illinois, and the current editor’s research on
the use of Tok Pisin in Papua New Guinea. Christie summarized the
most important lessons that Jamaicans can learn from these cases
(p.60):

1. Learning to
read and write in Creole initially does not negatively affect the
learning of the official language.
2. Learners readily transfer reading and writing skills learned
in Creole to learning to read and write the official European language.
3. Social and political factors, from both the leaders’ viewpoint
and that of the alleged beneficiaries, play a significant role in
the success or otherwise of policy decisions about language.
4. Teaching children about Creole is a useful means of overcoming
the stigma traditionally attached to it.

On
African American English
Lisa J. Green’s African American English: An Introduction
(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002) has a chapter titled
“Approaches, attitudes and education” (pp.216-242).
This begins with a discussion of the relationship between African
American English (AAE) and mainstream English (ME), the variety
closest to the standard, and attitudes toward AAE as a distinct
variety. She points out that many African Americans do not like
to see AAE characterized as unique and substantially different from
ME because it once again sets them apart from other Americans. This
could mean “buying into, if not providing more evidence for,
the claim that African Americans are inferior and language is just
another deficiency” (p.222). Green says such misconceptions
and negative attitudes toward AAE can be countered to some extent
by more clear descriptions of its rules and patterns in order to
show that it is a legitimate variety, and not slang or incorrect
English.

After a discussion of attitudes toward AAE and employment, Green
goes into the topic of education. First she describes the issue
of the “over-diagnosing and mislabeling child AAE speakers
as being communica-tively impaired” (p.227). Part of the problem
is that AAE children’s language is judged according to standards
of the ME-speaking community. She describes a research project at
the University of Massachusets to develop a language assessment
instrument specifically for child AAE speakers.

Green goes on to review AAE and education from the 1960s to the
21st century. She demonstrates how African American children still
lag behind whites in reading levels, and notes that since the 1960s
sociolinguists have been advocating that the differences between
children’s language (AAE) and ME should be taken into account.
Suggestions have also been made that texts and other materials written
in AAE should be used in the classroom. However, as Green points
out, most parents would not agree with these methods because “schools
are viewed as the very places where children can and should be able
to escape from the nonstandard language of the street and the less
educated” (p.230). Another criticism against the validation
of AAE in the classroom is that those who are advocating it have
already learned the standard and are benefiting from it; using AAE
in the classroom will deny children the chance to use the standard
and therefore deny them the chance to receive the same benefits.

With regard to classroom strategies, Green shows how constant correction
is a “very ineffective and counterproductive” practice
(p.234) because it inhibits students’ participation in the
educational process. (This is not to say, however, that poor performance
should be accepted.) She presents five principles put forward by
Labov that may be useful for teaching reading to AAE speakers.

Green continues by describing the “contrastive analysis”
approach which helps students to analyse the differences between
their own home varieties and the standard. This approach has been
advocated by many sociolinguists and teachers. Finally, she discusses
the use of reading materials in AAE or “dialect readers”.
These have produced some positive results and are also advocated
by many sociolinguists as a means not only for teaching reading,
but also for legitimizing the language. However, Green points out
some complications with using them, in addition to parents’
resistance. These include changing lexical items, no conventional
ways of spelling, and no information about children’s development
in AAE.

The chapter concludes with a discussion of the role of teachers
in implementing classroom strategies for AAE speakers. First of
all, these strategies do not require teachers to teach AAE, because
children have already acquired it. Instead, teachers should “be
responsible for understanding and respecting students’ language
and providing accurate mainstream English patterns that correspond
to the patterns in the child’s native dialect” (p.240).

Language,
Discourse and Power in African American Culture by
Marcyliena Morgan (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002)
also has a chapter on educational issues: “Language, discourse
and power: outing schools” (pp.132-52). The author stresses
that “even though much of the cultural activity, creativity
and intelligence [of African Americans] described in earlier chapters
have been ignored or denigrated within school systems, black people
believe that education is the key to success” (p.134). However,
she attempts to answer two important questions: “First, how
does the education system understand and address African American
language and cultural practices? Second, why do some scholars consistently
insist that black students oppose formal education… and what,
if anything, does this have to do with language? (p.134).

Morgan points out that during the public ridicule of AAE in the
Ebonics debate following the Oakland School Board resolution in
1996, one view which emerged was that “black people speak
AAE because they don’t want to participate in American society
in the same way as whites” (p.135). The educational policy
that goes along with this view is that African American children
should be taught only basic skills that prepare them for “non-career
employment”. The opposing view was that “black people
speak AAE for cultural and historical reasons and because of race
and class discrimination” (p.135). The educational policy
that goes along with this view is that African American children
should be taught not only basic skills but other areas that will
enable them to choose any employment that they wish. She then gives
some historical background about the “educating to do and
work” versus the “educating to know and learn”
positions (p.136). But in the wake of the Ebonics debate, there
was widespread agreement in the African American community that
all children should learn to speak “good English” –
i.e., mainstream English.

The chapter then goes into a discussion of “social pyschological
theories about literacy, race and social class in research and educational
policy” (p.137), including the deficit and deprivation approaches
and the teaching Standard English as a Second Dialect (SESD) approach
of the 1970s, which included some dialect materials. She observes:

[A]dministrators
of SESD programs did little to explain these programs to parents
and inform them about the dialect materials and how they would be
used in the teaching of standard literacy. Nor did they train teachers
about stereotypes, racism and the relationship between language
and culture, historical and language loyalty issues. This failure
to inform both parents and teachers had dire effects on all SESD
programs.

Parents were rightly concerned that these programs “did not
highlight the social functions of literacy” (p.140).

Next is a brief description of the origins of the Ebonics philosophy
– focussing on AAE as a unique variety of language that has
African roots, and as an important part of African American culture
and heritage.

Morgan continues
by describing the mismatch between working-class and African American
culture and the white middle-class culture of the schools. She notes
(p.143):
It is the unspoken dirty secret of public education: to receive
a middle-class education you must criticise working-class and African
American cultural practices. This creates a crisis of identity and
loyalty for students who want to excel academically without sacrificing
member-ship in their community.

Morgan
describes Carter G. Woodson’s notion of the “educated
fool” – “one whose education has made him or her
ashamed of African American history and culture” (p.144).
And she implies that educated African Americans who are opposed
to AAE are in this category. It is therefore true that many African
Americans associate the education system with whiteness and see
it as responsible for perpetuating negative attitudes toward their
culture and language. But Morgan argues that this does not mean
that African Americans do not value education, and she presents
a list of studies showing that education was a prestige indicator
in African American communities until the 1960s.

The chapter concludes by citing research which shows that rather
than resisting education in general, African American students are
resisting racial stereotypes and the denigration of the language
and culture in the education system. Morgan asks (p.151):

The question
that arises is whether African Americans want to be like the very
people who seem to want to eradicate their language and culture,
and whether refusing to be like them will result in exclusion from
the resources and rewards deemed necessary to survive in the United
States.

Part
IV of Sociocultural and Historical Contexts of African
American English edited by Sonja L. Lanehart (Benjamins,
Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 2001) is titled “African American
English and Education” and contains four chapters. The first
is “The role of family, community, and school in children’s
acquisition and maintenance of African American English” by
Toya A. Wyatt (pp.261-80). The author first gives an overview of
various theories of child language acquisition/development, and
then describes how children from African American English (AAE)-speaking
backgrounds are virtually the same as children from General American
English (GAE)-speaking backgrounds in their language development
up to age 3. She then discusses language diversity in the AAE child
speech community as a function of social class, region, and language
change, and cautions that educators “must avoid viewing the
language development of all African American children as homogeneous”
(p.268). Speech and language clinicians should also be careful to
distinguish speech disorders from normal AAE use for a particular
social group.

Wyatt goes on to describe variation as a function of linguistic
context and setting, and looks at the development of bilingual abilities
with regard to the second-dialect learning of GAE. She points out
that reactions and views of teachers, parents and peers to AAE and
GAE have an important effect on second-dialect learning, and warns
(p.275): “The unconscious or conscious denigration of a child’s
home language by teachers – whether direct, indirect, or implied
– can have deleterious consequences for second-dialect learner
success.” In addition, educators need to be aware that some
African American students may experience social pressure not to
use GAE where AAE is a key badge of social identity or solidarity
– especially during the teenage years. Finally, they should
be aware of “African Americans’ resistance to the use
of AAE in the instructional process” (p.276).

The next chapter, by Michèl Foster is “Pay Leon, pay
Leon, pay Leon paleontologist: Using call-and-response to facilitate
language mastery and literacy acquisition among African American
students” (pp.281-98). The author advocates the use of AAE
prosody or discourse modes, not just AAE phonology and syntax, in
the educational process. Here she describes the use of one such
discourse mode, “call-and-response” by one teacher in
primary school classrooms in San Francisco, and shows how it was
successful in teaching phonemic awareness, vocabulary development
and other skills, as well as in increasing enthusiasm and motivation
among the students. Foster notes that in using call-and-response,
the teacher used the students own social, cultural and linguistic
knowledge “to help students become skillful and adept at handling
new vocabulary words” (p.295). She continues:

At the same time
that the teacher honored and drew upon students’ indigenous
linguistic abilities, she juxtaposed these abilities with other
linguistic forms that she helped the students appreciate and learn.
This included patterns of discourse that invited students to articulate
a deeper understanding by talking aloud about the process of problem
solving or decision making…

William Labov is the author of the following chapter, “Applying
our knowledge of African American English to the problem of raising
reading levels in inner-city schools” (pp.299-317). He describes
the “profound and persistent” gap between reading achievement
of “Euro-Americans” and African Americans (p.301), and
reports on a teaching method aimed at reducing this gap. This method
involves “direct instruction on the ways in which letters
of the alphabet combine to signal the sounds of English” (p.307)
– for example, that in a word with the structure C-V-C-(e)
the final -e is not pronounced and the preceding vowel is long (with
a few exceptions). The experiments reported in this chapter show
that the method is effective in significantly reducing error rates
in reading and raising children’s reading levels to the Basic
level that is required by the educational system. However, the method
is not so successful in teaching the decoding of final consonant
clusters, which in AAE have a higher rate of simplification than
in other dialects of English. In this regard, Labov reports on a
program going beyond phonemic awareness to teach “morphophonemic
awareness”, to “develop the recognition of the abstract
rule that hides the inaudible – and invisible – stops
in ghosts, wasps, desks” (p.315).

The final chapter in this section is by John Baugh: “Applying
linguistic knowledge of African American English to help students
learn and teachers teach” (pp.319-330). Baugh argues that
“all successful education is a cooperative enterprise”
(p.319), and to improve the educational prospects for African American
students, there must be collaborative cooperation among “adult
educational advocates” (including parents and teachers), professional
educators (teachers, administrators, staff members), and the students
themselves. At the same time, progress cannot be made as long as
uninformed linguistic stereotypes about AAE being incorrect English
prevail among educators, and as long as a large number of schools
continue to lack resources and adequate standards. He concludes
by saying that “teachers who are respectful of their students,
including their linguistic heritage and vernacular culture, are
much more likely to be successful than are teachers who devalue
students who lack Gerneral American English proficiency” (p.329).

In the last chapter of the book, “Reconsidering the sociolinguistic
agenda for African American English: The next generation of research
and application” (pp.321-62), Walt Wolfram also touches on
some educational issues. He asserts that there is no rigorous evidence
of success in teaching GAE as a second dialect, and articulates
some principles that “might promote the prospects of success
without compromising the sociolinguistic integrity of speakers”
(pp.349-50). These are also relevant to teaching standard varieties
to speakers of creole, and include the following:

The teaching
of GAE must take into account the importance of the group reference
factor. Students will not be motivated to study a dialect that they
cannot imagine themselves using; but if they see that their own
group uses the dialect for certain purposes or groups that they
would like to be included in use the dialect, they are more likely
to regard dialect development as a sensible, natural extension of
their language knowledge.

The teaching of GAE should produce an understanding of the systematic
differences and social marking between GAE and vernacular forms,
beginning with heavily stigmatized features which affect large classes
of items. (p.350)

Wolfram also advocates teaching about the nature of dialect diversity,
especially through “dialect awareness programs”. He
observes (p.351): “The level of misinformation and prejudice
about language diversity in general and African American speech
in particular remains abysmally high; hence there is great need
for the adoption of school-based and community based language awareness
programs.”